دانلود رایگان مقالات الزویر - ساینس دایرکتدانلود رایگان مقالات سال 2018دانلود رایگان مقاله ISI روانشناسی به زبان انگلیسی سال 2022 و 2023دانلود رایگان مقاله ISI روانشناسی شناخت به زبان انگلیسیدانلود رایگان مقاله ISI هوش هیجانی به زبان انگلیسیسال انتشار
مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد هوش هیجانی و کج رفتاری اجتماعی در مردان و زنان – الزویر ۲۰۱۸
| مشخصات مقاله | |
| انتشار | مقاله سال ۲۰۱۸ |
| تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | ۸ صفحه |
| هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
| منتشر شده در | نشریه الزویر |
| نوع مقاله | ISI |
| عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | Trait emotional intelligence and social deviance in males and females |
| ترجمه عنوان مقاله | خصوصیات هوش هیجانی و کج رفتاری اجتماعی در مردان و زنان |
| فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
| رشته های مرتبط | روانشناسی |
| گرایش های مرتبط | روانشناسی شناخت |
| مجله | شخصیت و تفاوت های فردی – Personality and Individual Differences |
| دانشگاه | School of Psychology – University of Plymouth – UK |
| کلمات کلیدی | خصوصیات هوش هیجانی، رفتار ضد اجتماعی، انحراف اجتماعی، تفاوت های جنسیتی، بزرگسالان در حال ظهور، بلوغ |
| کد محصول | E5790 |
| وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
| دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
| سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
| بخشی از متن مقاله: |
| Trait Emotional Intelligence (trait EI) defines a constellation of affective dispositions and self-perceptions which together reflect the ability to identify, attend to, experience, understand and utilise emotions (Petrides, 2009; Petrides & Furnham, 2003; Petrides, Pita, & Kokkinaki, 2007). Trait EI integrates affective aspects of personality in terms of four factors: Wellbeing (high scorers feel, content, confident and fulfilled), Sociability (high scorers feel agentic in social contexts and have good interpersonal skills); Self-control (high scorers are good at controlling urges and desires, regulating external pressures and handling stress) and Emotionality (high scorers understand their own and others’ feelings and can use this ability in sustaining relationships with others; Petrides et al., 2007; Petrides, 2009; Petrides et al., 2016). Although correlated with other higher-order personality dimensions trait EI is distinct in personality factor space, showing clear incremental validity over models of personality such as the Big Five and Giant Three (e.g. Pérez-González & Sanchez-Ruiz, 2014; Petrides et al., 2007). Higher levels of trait EI are generally considered adaptive and are found to predict superior workplace performance (O’Boyle, Humphrey, Pollack, Hawver, & Story, 2011; Wong & Law, 2002), mental and physical health (Austin, Saklofske, & Egan, 2005; Schutte, Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Bhullar, & Rooke, 2007), social relationships (Mavroveli, Petrides, Rieffe, & Bakker, 2007), educational achievement and fewer unauthorized absences and school exclusions (Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004). In defining the construct, it is important to note the distinction between trait EI, as assessed by self-report, and ability EI which is measured by maximum performance tests in a similar way to intelligence (Petrides et al., 2007). While both emphasise managing and understanding emotions, the conceptual differences between the two are reflected in empirical data which has shown very low correlations between measures of the two constructs (O’Connor & Little, 2003; Warwick & Nettelbeck, 2004). A review by Zeidner, Matthews, and Roberts (2012) has indicated that self-report measures of EI appear to be more robustly related to health and well-being criteria than are ability-based measures and the present studies are concerned with this trait EI approach. In the present studies, we are interested in the relationship between individual differences in trait EI and socially deviant behaviour. For this purpose, we define social deviance in terms of the description of antisocial behaviour offered by Rutter (2003) who suggested that it be characterized as nonconformity, disregard or unwillingness to adhere to rules and obligations imposed by society or social organizations. As such, it may include criminal acts which violate specific laws, but also behaviours which are not in themselves illegal but which contradict the social norms of the culture in which the individual resides, for instance, cheating in exams bullying and name-calling can be classed as antisocial by this definition. |
